Interdisciplinary teaching: Science in Culture

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

Professor Nick Battey, School of Biological Sciences
n.h.battey@reading.ac.uk

Overview

12402A module for Part Three students was created by a collaborative effort between the Department of English Literature, the Department of History, and the School of Biological Sciences (SBS), called Science in Culture. This module was well-received by students, who found value in obtaining the perspective of disciplines other than their own, and experiencing teaching and learning methods outside the norm of their previous study.

Objectives

  • Offer a truly disciplinary module allowing students from English Literature, History, and SBS to study alongside one another, learning through the diverse teaching methods of science and the humanities.
  • Develop in students a broader, critical understanding of the precepts of science.
  • Provide an integrated view of science (with emphasis on Biological Sciences) within culture.

Context

The development of this collaborative module grew out of an Arts and Humanities Research Council sponsored project which looked at the value of literary and historical study of biology to students of biological sciences. An element of this was a workshop, ‘Cultivating Common Ground’, which aimed to foster interdisciplinary discussion between biology and the humanities. One of the key findings of the scoping study was that it would be beneficial to develop at least one module that taught both biology and humanities students alongside one another in an interdisciplinary way.

Implementation

The module was developed over a number of years by staff from SBS, English and History. The module designers from the different disciplines were determined to ensure that what was developed was a truly interdisciplinary module, breaking down the perceived divide between the sciences and the humanities, and showing how the different approaches and bodies of knowledge bear on the same questions.

The module is taught over one term. Students receive lectures and partake in seminar discussions on a historical, literary, or scientific concept, and also conduct lab work on subjects related to those explored in the lectures. As an example of this, in lab work students will identify a mutated gene, and explore the use of mutations for understanding how genes work. This topic of mutation can then be explored in its literary and historic contexts. The difference that exists between the scientific, literary and historical approaches can then be explored as a cultural challenge. From the ‘Cultivating Common Ground’ workshop, consensus had emerged that interdisciplinary learning and teaching needed to be ‘narrow and deep’. As a result, the module focuses on a defined set of ‘problems’, rather than ‘grand themes’, allowing a deeper exploration thereof, and situation of this within the cultural dynamics and methods of science.

In order to ensure students experience different ways of learning, students were given a variety of tasks, ranging from interpreting poems or discussing the history of a scientific process, which they recorded in a learning journal, these being marked and receiving feedback from tutors each week. While the completion of this task over the course of the module was an aspect of the summative assessment, the weekly feedback provided regular formative feedback to students. A focus on formative assessment was recognised as being important by the scoping study, as students on such an interdisciplinary module would require greater opportunity to learn what was expected of them. Linking formative assessment to the summative assessment ensured that students would be motivated to engage and receive valuable feedback. Students taking the module as part of a History or English Literature degree, for whom the module was worth 20 credits, rather than 10, also wrote a summative essay.

Impact

The project was successful in delivering a truly interdisciplinary module, with collaboration between the School of Biological Studies, the Department of English and the Department of History. The module was well-received by students, who reported that they appreciated the value of getting different perspectives on their disciplines.

Reflections

The greatest challenge in creating this module was achieving interdisciplinarity, as the teaching and learning strategies best suited to the individual disciplines were not necessarily suited to the teaching of an interdisciplinary module. That the module was in development for a number of years reflects the difficulty that developing an interdisciplinary approach, and this was made increasingly difficult by the paucity of existing literature on the topic from which to draw suitable practices. As a result, there had to be a number of iterative developments in order to create a module that could be delivered in a way which best achieved its learning outcomes.

Interdisciplinarity also provided a challenge with regards marking of assessments. As each discipline has different expectations, it was necessary for marking to be a collaborative process, with compromise being reached between assessors.

While the provision of multiple opportunities for formative assessment and feedback had value, given that it helped introduce students to the other disciplines, and encouraged deep learning, the process was strenuous, for both students and staff.

As the module was interdisciplinary, this meant that students had to engage with topics and processes outside the norm of their previous academic study. As a result, despite their enjoyment and high attainment, students on the module did find it challenging.

Follow up

Following the successful running of the module during the 2014-15 academic year, the module has been offered again, with slight revisions. One of the revisions has been in assessment, with students producing a report at the end of the module, rather than creating a learning portfolio over the course of the module, thus somewhat reducing the workload of staff and students. A group presentation has also been introduced, providing a different type of assessment, and making interdisciplinary collaborative group work part of summative assessment.

Links

Redesigning postgraduate curricula on commercial law through student engaging, research-informed and multidisciplinary pathway programmes

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

Professor Stavroula Karapapa, School of Law                          s.karapapa@reading.ac.uk

Overview

In 2015/2016, we substantially redeveloped our postgraduate provision in commercial law through the introduction of a pioneering, student-engaging, research-informed and multidisciplinary set of postgraduate pathway programmes. Contrary to the programmes previously in place, the new curriculum is unique in its pathway design allowing students to develop a breadth of commercial law expertise whilst also specialising in their area of interest (for a full list of programmes see here). The project on which this entry reflects has resulted in an innovative curriculum that shaped the identity of Centre for Commercial Law and Financial Regulation (CCLFR) as a centre of excellence on cutting-edge themes of commercial law.

Objectives

  • To redevelop our postgraduate curriculum in commercial law through the introduction of cutting-edge themes of study based on the principles of research-informed and multidisciplinary teaching.
  • To empower student learning, improve student experience, and foster the development of a learning community.
  • To hear the student voice towards the design of the curriculum and to proactively and directly engage ‘students as partners’ in the development and evaluation of the core module for the new programmes.

Context

As often happens in Higher Education, the postgraduate programmes in Commercial Law previously in place were the result of the work of independent colleagues at various points in time, starting in 2011. Modular options reflected this dynamic, and they were also impacted by continuous staffing changes over the years. The pathway programmes are the result of collective effort within the School of Law, effective consultation with students and evaluation of their feedback, and constructive collaboration with colleagues from various Schools and services across the University (including marketing, careers, conversions etc.).

Implementation

Following a review of our PGT provision, we redeveloped our commercial law curriculum on the basis of three pillars:

  1. student feedback (module evaluation forms and ‘graduation’ forms collected since 2011) concerning suggestions for improvement, informal comments from students enrolled in 2015/2016 on ideas for new modules/programmes and engagement of ‘students as partners’ in the development of the core module for the new pathway programmes;
  2. extensive market study carried out by marketing and the (then) PGT Director regarding areas worth expanding on;
  3. expansion of our module offerings through the valuable contribution of numerous colleagues in the School of Law and consultation with various Schools across the University that agreed to open up relevant modules, effectively enhancing multidisciplinarity in our programmes.

Instead of offering numerous programmes with no clear link to each other, we introduced a set of pathway programmes (including 5 new PGT programmes and a redesign of the existing ones) whereby all programmes are centred around one core legal field, International Commercial Law, and students have the option to follow a pathway on a specialist area designed around our research strengths as a School and as a University, essentially building on research-informed teaching. Part of this redesigning process was the revision of the compulsory module for all pathways, LWMTAI-Advanced Issues in Commercial Law, which was based on the engagement of students as partners, drawing on a UoR small-scale research project that was initiated in June 2016, an entry of which is available here and here.

Impact

The collective effort of numerous colleagues in the School of Law and the support from various Schools and services across the University resulted in the development of a pioneering set of pathway programmes, centred around the values of research-informed teaching and multidisciplinarity and developed on the basis of student feedback. The project enhanced student engagement, taking on board student views on the learning design. The redrafting of a core module (LWMTAI) had direct impact on student learning, enabling students to proactively review their own learning process and to develop an increased sense of leadership and motivation. There was also positive correlation between the introduction of new pathways (especially Information Technology and Commerce; Energy Law and Natural Resources) and PGT recruitment. Anecdotal evidence indicates that the conversion rate of existing PGT students to our PGR programme has also increased. Importantly, the redevelopment of our programmes created a distinctive identity for CCLFR as a centre of excellence on cutting-edge themes of commercial law.

Reflections

The success of the redevelopment of our PGT curriculum was based on three pillars:

  1. Collective effort: The redevelopment of the programmes required the engagement of various colleagues from the School of Law who met on numerous occasions to reflect on the programmes and introduced new modules on cutting-edge themes to meet the needs of the new pathway design. This effort exceeded business as usual. An example of such collective effort is the redesign of the core module of the pathway programmes which followed the ‘student as partners’ approach and was implemented with the collaboration of various members of staff from the School of Law.
  2. Student engagement: Unlike what usually happens in higher education with ex post student feedback, the pathway design used that feedback constructively towards designing new programmes, taking into consideration student comments in evaluation forms and also engaging students in the programme design process. Importantly, it was students themselves that proactively informed the curriculum of the core module for all pathway programmes, with their voice having being heard even before the completion of the taught component.
  3. Cutting-edge themes and research-informed teaching: At the heart of student feedback was the desire to increase the number of modular offerings from other Schools and Departments, effectively to enhance the multidisciplinary approach that was already in place. Introducing more modules from other Schools to our curriculum on the basis of their relevance and appropriateness to our pathways has become a learning process to us as educators in that it has resulted in dynamic synergies and an innovative curriculum as end-result of the exercise.

Links

Details on our new pathway programmes are available here: http://www.reading.ac.uk/law/pg-taught/law-pgt-courses.aspx

Engaging students as partners in the redesign of an existing course curriculum

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

Dr Despoina Mantzari, School of Law
d.mantzari@reading.ac.uk

Overview

In June 2016 I was awarded a small University of Reading Teaching and Learning grant with the objective to involve a group of ten postgraduate taught students from the School of Law as partners in the process of redesigning the curriculum of a core postgraduate taught module. This entry reflects on the process of engaging students as partners in the redesign of an existing course curriculum. It discusses how insights from the burgeoning literature on students as partners in higher education informed the process and assesses the outcomes of the latter for improving and supporting teaching and learning.

Objectives

  • To listen to the ‘student voice’ before course delivery, by proactively engaging students as partners in the redesign of the module.
  • To co-create learning experiences in collaboration with students that goes beyond the student satisfaction surveys and other ex-post forms of evaluation.
  • To redesign a module so that it is both engaging and empowering.

Context

The module Advanced International Commercial Law Issues (LWMTAI), being a core compulsory module of the new LLM, had to be redesigned so as to fit into the new programme requirements. In doing so, I wanted to listen to the ‘student voice’ before course delivery, by proactively engaging students as partners in the redesign of the module. This exercise departs from current practice in higher education, where ‘student voice’ is largely heard following the completion of the taught component of the module on a Module Evaluation Form.

Implementation

Guided by the values of inclusion and partnership, I first emailed all students enrolled on the module in its pre-revised form (2015-16) and introduced the project and its aims, and invited expressions of interest. In order to further test the modules’ renewed approach to the theoretical framework and other relevant components, I also invited a group of five students who had never been enrolled on the module to participate in the project. In selecting this latter group of five students, I was guided by considerations of diversity, both in terms of ethnic and cultural background as well as prior exposure to commercial law. Inviting all LLM students who had never enrolled on the project would have been inappropriate for the aims of the project and would render it difficult to manage. Both previously used (prior to 2015-16) and revised module description forms (to be introduced in 2016-17) of the module were circulated to both groups along with a questionnaire. All students involved were asked to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of the module, as reflected in the module description forms, along with other concerns or recommendations they wished to share. These were discussed during a two-hour event, open to all students participating in the project and School of Law staff involved in postgraduate taught and undergraduate Law teaching.

Impact

The project enhanced student motivation and engagement, and fostered the development of a learning community within the School of Law. Students enjoyed their participation in the project and in particular their contribution to the event that followed. They were fascinated by their collaboration with staff and by their active role in critically reviewing the course curriculum.

The project also helped students to review their own learning process and allowed them to develop an increased sense of leadership and motivation. It also increased their confidence to express their views in academic settings. Student involvement facilitated the design of the module in ways that significantly improved it.

The project had a transformative effect on the way I perceive my role as an educator and the boundaries thereof.

Reflections

Three key factors contributed to the project’s success:

First, the fact that I ‘institutionalised’ the project by applying for a University of Reading Teaching and Learning Small Research Grant not only allowed me to fund the activities, but also raised the profile of the project in the eyes of both students and staff.

Second, the careful selection of those elements of the curriculum redesign that would be part of the student-staff partnership. I opted for a model of interaction where students are given limited choice and influence. The reason for this related to the nature of the project, which concerned the redesign of an existing module in its entirety. When engaging students as partners, reciprocity cannot always be fulfilled, as high-stake issues of module redesigns, such as the theoretical framework or methods of assessment cannot be entirely handed over to students. Students may find themselves confused if a tutor hands over total control of such an important element without preparation or guidance. Such practice may jeopardise the gatekeeper function of the educator.

The third element went to the heart of student as partner practice: how many students to involve in the project, and by which means. The literature suggests that students as partners can involve work with individuals, small groups, and situations where students are invited to become partners, or even elected or selected. While the literature has drawn attention to the potential benefits of whole cohort approaches, it may be difficult, impossible, or even undesirable in some contexts to involve all students at all times. In this case, a whole-cohort approach could not be adopted, as some students enrolled in the module in its pre-revised form had already left the University. Furthermore, selecting students could potentially undermine the values of inclusion, respect and responsibility that underpin the students as partners approach. Meaningful partnership requires a high level of equality and contribution from partners, and that would be jeopardised by implementing an approach that would invite to the project only student that the module convenor deemed suitable to participate.

A student-led experiential post-studio practice

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

Holly Sandford, Arts & Communication Design

Overview

Students in the Department of Art created a student-led experiential post-studio practice, DISCOMFORT, for Part Two students and teachers that challenges boundaries and restrictions within our art course (and ourselves), and encourages participatory, experiential sessions and activities, within and outside of the studio.

Objectives

  • Build two-way working relationships between students and teachers.
  • To provide a forum for the development of key research skills relating to the capacity to generate original knowledge.
  • To provide a forum for the development of key skills relating to the presentation of ideas in written form.
  • To encourage collaboration.

Context

We decided to create this module as a group of friends who used the studio a lot, with the hope of creating a more familiar and social working environment that people could use to their advantage within the course. We felt the studio had a lot of potential that wasn’t being taken advantage of, and wanted to use the opportunity to start student-led, student-chosen experiences and art.

Implementation

We planned four reflection/discussion sessions, and four workshop/activity sessions that reflected our philosophy of discomfort. This did not necessarily mean something that was ‘uncomfortable’, but something that pushed boundaries or was an alternative way of working; such as durational activities with restricted senses, collaborative sculptures made by groups of 3 people tied together with found objects in the studio, a water floating experience and a trip to watch court cases. We created posters to advertise the module and emailed teachers within the department about taking part, as the sessions ran weekly. We altered days and times according to when the majority of people were free, and contacted outside organisations about trips and activities. We also exhibited work in the Rising Sun Arts centre at an exhibition ran by an older student.

Reflections

Positive outcomes were the level of participation from the students and teachers who did attend, and their positive feedback and experiences they gave/had in the sessions. Everyone enjoyed themselves, as well as actively joining in with discussion and reflection is an interesting and engaging way, as well as taking their own time to record their thoughts on their own blogs.

The biggest difficulty we faced was advertising and widespread participation, as the module was at first held on a Monday, and wasn’t a compulsory or officially graded part of the course. In future, we would approach and work with more teachers, as well as the Fine Arts society, and advertise the sessions less as ‘a module’, focusing more on activities and experimentation. We feel that the sessions were successful, but would work even better and benefit even more with more participation from more students and teachers, as well as people outside of the department, and the university.

Follow up

Whilst the sessions ended when term did, the exhibition was held during summer, in which we did a collaborative piece within the exhibition itself. By encouraging people outside of the department to become involved in our project, we were reaching a different audience, engaging in different ways but to the same purpose. This took the project even further, and developed it into a wider discursive project.

Links

DISCOMFORT website

LW2RPP – Research Placement Project

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

Dr. Stavroula Karapapa, Law
s.karapapa@reading.ac.uk

Overview

Research Placement Project (LW2RPP) is a module developed within the School of Law that aims to provide Part Two students with a hands-on experience of the academic research process, from the design of a project and research question through to the production of a research output. It is an optional module that combines individual student research, lectures and seminars.

Objectives

  • To provide students with a hands-on experience of the academic research process, from the design of a project and research question through to the production of a research output.
  • To provide a forum for the development of key research skills relating to the capacity to generate original knowledge.
  • To provide a forum for the development of key skills relating to the presentation of ideas in written form.
  • To give the opportunity to obtain an in-depth understanding of a specific applied topic of legal study.

Context

The module was initially developed as an alternative to Legal Writing Credit (LW2LWC) with a view to offer more optional modules to Law students at Part Two.

Implementation

The module has a unique learning design in that it introduces law students to semi-guided legal research through lectures, seminars and independent student learning. The lectures introduce students to research methods. Seminars are lead by experts in a particular area that have a strong interest in a specific topic because they currently carry out research on it. We have had a variety of topics offered throughout the four years that the module runs, spanning international law, criminal law, company law, media law, family law etc. Students are given the option to choose their group at the beginning of the academic year and to work on topics related to a specific research area.

During the module, students receive formative feedback on two occasions, as they are required to present a piece of preparatory work, such as a literature review or draft bibliography, in their second and third project supervision sessions, with these pieces forming the basis for discussion with their supervisor and with peers. Students are therefore able to use this formative feedback to direct their final output, an assessed essay of 10 pages.

Impact

The objectives of the activity have been met. Students have been acquainted with a particular research area and they have developed skills and some experience on legal research writing. Having colleagues deliver seminars on their current areas of research is valuable, as it showcases the wide variety of research in Law that takes place within the School and the subject more generally, and students respond well to this element of the module. The outputs that students produce have generally been of a good quality, and have demonstrated an ability to use appropriate methodologies to conduct and utilise independent research. Involvement in a research project of this nature at Part Two has been valuable for students to develop skills which they then continue to utilise at Part Three, particularly in their dissertation.

Reflections

The main force behind the success of the module is the contribution of the various colleagues that volunteer every year to offer some classes and group supervision to Part Two students.

Classics Special Options: research-led teaching

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

Dr Katherine Harloe, School of Humanities
k.c.harloe@reading.ac.uk

Overview

11671All options in Classics Special Options (CLMSO) are research-led and arise directly from current research projects of academic staff. Students greatly enjoy learning about topics of current research within the subject, and members of staff report that they find teaching on their specialised topics of research interest very rewarding.

Ojectives

  • Utilise current research within the Department of Classics to offer students topics that are at the forefront of research within the topic.
  • Introduce postgraduate taught students to advanced research in Classics on two topics.
  • Provide students with access to primary and unpublished materials in order to allow them to engage with research modelling to develop their views.

Context

CLMSO is a well-established element of postgraduate taught provision within the Department of Classics at the University of Reading, and complements similar research-led optional modules offered at undergraduate level. Providing the module means that the current research of staff within the Department of Classics can have a direct and identifiable link to their teaching.

Implementation

Members of staff are asked to offer two research topics, with the understanding that only one of these will be run in relation to demand. Staff create a description of their topic and a preliminary bibliography, and these are used to advertise their topic. In order to ensure balance across the Department of Classics, the Department Director of Taught Postgraduate Learning is responsible for approving the options that staff offer. As a result, a diverse profile of topics across the research interests of the Department can be guaranteed.

Students enrolled on CLMSO will do two topics: for each they select a first and second choice. Generally it is attempted to avoid situations in which only one student will be taking a topic, but on occasion it is necessary to do so. In such situations, the contact hours are able to be run in a manner more akin to dissertation supervision, with the student able to gain directed feedback as they write their extended essay.

The seminars of CLMSO, which are run in the Spring Term, begin with a setting-up meeting, allowing the staff to meet all the students, if they have not done so already, to ascertain the expectations of the students, and to set the learning outcomes from the topic. With small group sizes, it is possible for staff to tailor the teaching of their topic so that it meets the expectations of the students, while still ensuring that the learning outcomes are met.

For assessment in each topic, students produce an extended 4000 word essay. This is then marked and returned to the students with detailed feedback. The feedback that students receive at this stage is valuable for students’ work on their dissertations.

Impact

The module is consistently enjoyed by students, who have expressed, through formal and informal feedback channels, their appreciation for being able to study topics that represent the forefront of research being conducted in the subject area.  Staff also report that it is rewarding to teach topics related to their current research.

Reflection

Staff often report that they find being able to offer a specific topic in which they have research interests an enjoyable aspect of postgraduate teaching, and particularly value being able to tailor the delivery of their topics to the needs of a small group. By presenting their current research, staff are able to benefit from the activity of structuring and clarifying their research in such a way that allows the topic to be taught.

Students benefit from the increased proximity to the process of research that they are able to gain, offering them access to primary or unpublished materials, and an insight into the process of conducting research. This insight is particularly beneficial to students who are considering moving to postgraduate research after completing their Master’s degree. As the module is taught at postgraduate level staff are able to incorporate more advanced content than is possible at undergraduate level, including trialling material intended for publication and therefore enabling students to observe the link between research and outputs.

The module is workable within the Department of Classics at taught postgraduate level, as there is more scope for flexibility, given the smaller cohort sizes. As a result, while this module design may be replicable within other subject areas with small cohort sizes, it may be more difficult to reproduce in subjects with larger cohort sizes.

As it is not necessary to list the specific options that are on offer each year, the module is easy to administer, as only minor adjustments need to be made to the module description each year.

The principal difficulty of the module has been student disappointment if they are not able to get their first choices of topics. As a result, it has been necessary to reinforce to students that the topics from which they chose are not guaranteed to run, if there is not sufficient demand. In previous years, there were issues whereby students were not sufficiently made aware of the learning outcomes for certain topics. In subsequent years, staff have been asked to set and adhere to clear learning outcomes, with students made aware of these.

Constructing research methods and statistics teaching

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

Dr Lotte Meteyard, School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences
l.meteyard@reading.ac.uk

Overview

Statistics teaching to Speech and Language Therapists within the Department of Clinical Language Sciences was redesigned in response to module evaluations. Whereas students had previously reported anxiety about statistics and struggled to appreciate the relevance of statistics to their practice, the introduction of formative learning activities which integrated statistics teaching with other module content produced a reduction in anxiety about statistics, a benefit to students’ grades, and an increase in student module satisfaction with their statistics training.

Objectives

  • Increase the opportunities for students to consolidate and revisit knowledge of key concepts.
  • Make explicit links within and across the teaching content to clinical practice.
  • Provide learning activities, outcomes and objectives that are clear to students.

Context

The Research Proposal (PL3RPR) module is compulsory for all Part Three undergraduate and taught postgraduate students within the Department of Clinical Language Sciences. The module provides research methods and statistics teaching, and during the module students plan a research module and complete an ethics application, with these being used for their dissertations. Feedback, however, revealed that students found the statistics lectures confusing and poorly related to other module content. Having teaching provided by a number of staff members contributed to the module having a fragmentary nature.

Implementation

In order to increase the opportunities for students to consolidate and revisit knowledge of key concepts, technology, multiple practice and collaboration were focused on in order to create frequent, meaningful activities for students to complete. Lecture handouts were provided separate from the lecture slides in order to encourage engagement during lectures, and practical activities were used to teach basic quantitative concepts and research design. During activities, analyses of data was completed as a class, and formative exercises were set each week, involving a short reading and answering focused questions on that reading. These assessments were revisited at the start of each lecture in order to feedback and discuss answers to questions. In labs, written instructions were replaced with short videos demonstrating how to complete particular procedures. Worksheets required students to write out results and answer questions about the interpretation of data. The answers to these worksheets were made available on Blackboard Learn after the end of each lab class. For each week of statistics teaching an online multiple choice questionnaire was provided, offering students optional online practice in preparation for the statistics class test. Students were encouraged to have the statistical analysis software PASW or SPSS installed on their home devices to allow them to practice away from lectures.

To make explicit links within and across the teaching content and to clinical practice, the content of the module was restructured so that students were introduced to a particular concept, with this concept then being revisited in later activities. In order to build explicit links with clinical practice students were asked to identify why research skills are important for clinical work, to complete formative assessments that involved reading chapters on healthcare research or journal articles from speech therapy research. Key readings were taken from ‘real world’ sources, such as the magazine of the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapy or the NHS. Reflection was encouraged through formative assignments which were discussed in the following week’s lecture. These required student to identify why healthcare research is critical to practice, critique a randomised controlled trial, and identify research designs and statistical tests in clinically relevant journal articles.

To provide learning activities, outcomes and assessment tasks that are aligned and clear to students, the learning outcomes of the module were rewritten and linked directly to the summative assessments. Three summative assessments were themselves changed so that students prepared a research proposal poster, an ethics application and a statistics class test. The research proposal poster was introduced to give practice at a professional skill and reduce the duplication of content between making the proposal and the ethics application. By making the ethics application a summative assessment, students would be assessed on something directly relevant to the completion of their project, while only minimal staff input would be required for the document to be submitted to the School ethics committee. The weighting of each piece of assessment was changed so that they contributed more evenly to the overall module mark. Learning activities were designed to support students in accessing and evaluating literature, generating research designs and statistical analyses. By providing research proposal and ethics application examples, and templates for their own on Blackboard Learn alongside detailed guidelines for completing coursework, student were encouraged to seek out supporting material independently.

Impact

Students on the module completed a statistical knowledge multiple choice questionnaire during the first week of the module and again after completing their statistics class test. They also completed the Statistical Anxiety Scale before beginning the module, and again at the end of the module. Results demonstrated that statistical knowledge increased, with students’ median score going from 11/20 before the course (with a range between 5-14) to 15/20 after the course (with a range between 8 and 19). There was also a reduction in anxiety about statistics. Results also demonstrated that there was a significant positive correlation between the number of formative multiple choice questionnaires a student completed and their final score on the statistics class test. Median marks in the class test and research proposal both improved from the previous year, with no students failing the statistics class test. Student module satisfaction also increased.

Reflections

Situating the statistics and research methods teaching in practical activities and in the context of students’ professional learning was one of the most powerful changes made to the module: students responded positively to practical activities used to demonstrate statistical concepts. While full participation could not be guaranteed, enough students completed tasks to allow discussion and review of these at the beginning of each lecture.

By using technology for students to practice skills away from the classroom, students were able to increase their knowledge of statistics after the course. It was particularly gratifying to see the correlation between the number of multiple choice questionnaires completed on Blackboard Learn and the attainment of students during the statistics class test.

Having resources external to the classes available, the module convenor could be assured that students could have sufficient time and experience with concepts and software.

International Law Mooting

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

Professor James Green, Law
j.a.green@reading.ac.uk
Year of activity: 2007-08

Overview

Since 2007, the Law School has run a Part Three module entitled ‘International Law Mooting’. This is a highly innovative module, where a team of four students participate in the prestigious Telders International Law Moot Court Competition. The competition involves the team presenting written – and then, crucially, oral – arguments on a fictional dispute in international law.

Objectives

  • Memorials are jointly written and a single mark is given to all students: this builds teamwork, and prepares students for the submission of written memorials in real cases.
  • The oral performance is assessed, meaning that advocacy and presentation skills are developed.
  • Students are also assessed on individual reflective portfolios, which reward reflective learning and emphasize skill development.

Context

The team competes externally, for the University of Reading, against other universities. This gives the University of Reading a profile nationally and internationally, and provides students with a wonderful experience. The work required to compete in the competition is significant, and so – after entering for the first time in 2006 as an extra-curricular activity – it was decided that student effort here had to be rewarded with appropriate degree credit, hence the creation of the module. It develops a wide range of practical legal skills that are simply not part of other, traditional, law modules.

Implementation

Of the various issues that arose with regard to implementing the mooting module, the most pertinent for possible implementation elsewhere is the manner in which this module was to be assessed to give best effect to its learning objectives. A key learning objective was to develop communication and advocacy skills – but there is a danger of placing emphasis entirely on the student’s performance in the single external moot. Pressure is high, and ‘stage fright’ very possible. It is also difficult to ensure quality review of the marking of oral presentations/mooting. It was therefore decided that this issue could be addressed by complementing the marks awarded for the oral performance by also awarding a percentage of the marks for a reflective assessment. This ensured that students gained the credit that they were due for their skill development across the module as a whole, and not just based on the moot final alone.

Impact

The module has been hugely successful over the years. Students consistently give extremely positive feedback on the unique module design, and team-orientated nature of the module. It is also almost always the case that students gain extremely high marks in the module, with a significant number of firsts having been awarded. Indeed, no student has achieved an overall module mark below the 2:1 classification in 9 years of running the module.

Reflections

We have, of course, reflected on the module over the years. One change we made was to increase the percentage of the overall grade for the oral performance, and to slightly reduce the amount for the portfolio. This was in response to student feedback – we had the balance a little too heavily on rewarding the reflection, and students felt they should get rather more credit for the moot itself. We feel, after reflection and a few tweaks to the module design, that the assessment methods now best suit the learning outcomes. By and large, though, the module is a resounding success and continues to run in a form that is not too dissimilar from what was originally envisaged in 2007.

Follow up

Nothing beyond what is stated in the ‘Reflections’ box, above.

Links

The Module Description Form for International Law Mooting: http://www.reading.ac.uk/modules/document.aspx?modP=LW3ILM&modYR=1617

The website for the external Telders competition: http://teldersmoot.com/

Diversifying a core skills module (English Literature)

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

Dr Nicola Abram, Literature and Languages
n.l.abram@reading.ac.uk
Year of activity: 2015-6

Overview

11176

This entry describes the diversification of a core Part One English Literature module, Research & Criticism (EN1RC). As a result of the changes outlined here, every graduate of English Literature at the University of Reading will have encountered Anglophone texts from across the world, and considered critical issues around ‘race’, ethnicity, gender and sexuality.

Objectives

  • To construct a diverse curriculum that is representative of a wide range of identities and experiences.
  • To expose students to the rich variety of global literatures in English.
  • To promote critical thinking about processes of canon formation.

Context

Over 200 students enter English Literature programmes at the University of Reading each year, from a range of educational backgrounds. To ensure they all have the key skills and theoretical understanding needed to succeed throughout their degrees, we run a compulsory module in the first year called ‘Research & Criticism’. I was tasked with convening this module from 2014/15.

The module’s priorities of delivering skills training and theoretical literacy – rather than focussing on a particular period, author, or literary genre – produce the freedom to draw on diverse texts. I recognised in this an opportunity to redress the Eurocentrist and white supremacist organisation of the established literary canon.

This reform was timely: a student-led campaign called ‘Why is my curriculum white?’ began at UCL in November 2014 and spread across various higher education institutions, questioning the narrow and exclusionary nature of a range of degree programmes. At a subject-specific level, the QAA Subject Benchmark Statement was revised to describe the duty attendant on literary studies to represent the subject’s diversity: “The geographical, historical and social varieties of written and spoken English, and the range of world literatures written in or translated into English, enrich the subject and its study”.

Implementation

The first step was to consider the existing course content and assess it for diversity and inclusivity. I found it useful to ask the question: ‘What kind of student does this module imagine?’. Alternatively, you might look at how many of the works cited are authored by women or non-white people, or published in the Global South. In the sciences and social sciences, you might consider how far your case studies prioritise Eurocentric concerns or population samples – and whether this is intellectually necessary. If not, from where else could you source your material?

My own research in postcolonial and feminist literature meant I was familiar with a pool of texts that could be drawn on. The final reading list included texts that engage with black British, African American, Indo-Canadian, Nigerian, and Palestinian contexts, as well as those raising issues of imperialism, heteronormativity, and gender performativity. Other academics searching for equivalent materials could consult relevant subject associations for colleagues’ suggestions (such as the Postcolonial Studies Association, Feminist and Women’s Studies Association, etc.).

I chose to limit the set texts to short stories and critical essays, continuing the model I inherited with the module. I felt a series of manageable readings would promote students’ sustained engagement, given that the content was likely to be unfamiliar to many of them. I would encourage others to think similarly about the context in which students will encounter this material, and plan accordingly.

I drafted a proposed reading list and lecture schedule, which was circulated to colleagues in the Department of English Literature. The communications that followed helped to refine the plans, producing a module that would be appropriate for new entrants – who are facing significant personal and educational transitions – as well as sufficiently challenging.

At the end of the first year that the module ran, a meeting with the teaching team helped to further polish its content and organisation.

Impact

Students’ feedback has affirmed that: “The content of this course made me raise questions about the way I read and how I understand a text”, “Everything I thought I knew was challenged by what was talked about”, and “Although at times it made your head hurt, once you got around the idea it linked brilliantly to everything else and made you question everything else you ever read”.

Colleagues have commented that students’ sophistication has demonstrably improved in other modules, as they apply the skills of critical thinking learned in ‘Research & Criticism’ to enrich coursework that does not explicitly require – but nonetheless benefits from – such theoretical scaffolding.

It has been an unexpected pleasure to signpost forward from this module to options available later in the degree, and to potential dissertation topics. This will be formalised with the development of Pathways on the English Literature degree programmes. A Pathway consists of linked modules on a particular topic, such as Creative Writing; participating students receive acknowledgement of this specialism on their degree transcript. There are several junctures at which students can opt in: they may enrol from the beginning as a Pathway student, or join at the end of Part One or Part Two, which allows for those who come to consciousness of a topic later or feel able to commit to it only after some initial study.

Reflections

The revisions to the module successfully reflected a wide range of identities and experiences, and exposed students to the rich variety of global literatures in English. It is vital that this material sits at the core of the degree programme, to ensure that all students are exposed to it and to avoid the subject being devalued as peripheral or ‘minor’. However, the effort to integrate and embed this material into the curriculum may unwittingly render its differences invisible, and reduce its oppositional potency. For this reason the module works especially well as the foundation for a Pathway; later in the degree, in more specialist modules, more time can be given to establishing the relevant contexts necessary for mature interpretation.

Perhaps most successfully met was the aim to promote critical thinking about what literatures are valued, and why. By centring non-canonical writers, this module actively encourages norm-critical thinking. It foregrounds the importance of questioning the canon rather than simply adding to or updating it.

Follow up

The module continues to run as part of our compulsory offering for new entrants to English Literature programmes. It has been presented as a model of good practice at RUSU’s Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic conference (1 June 2015) and at a University of Reading Teaching and Learning Showcase on ‘Diversifying the Curriculum’ (18 January 2016).

To flag up how students might continue their learning on ‘Research & Criticism’ into future optional modules, we have since designed posters which formally indicate connections: ‘Critical Issues’, and ‘Writing, Gender & Identity’ in Part Two, and ‘Class Matters’ and ‘Psychoanalysis and Text’ at Part Three. These posters are displayed to prospective students at Open Days, and within the Department throughout the year.

Links

Universities Scotland Race Equality Toolkit:
http://www.universities-scotland.ac.uk/raceequalitytoolkit/

‘Why Is My Curriculum White?’, UCL, November 2014:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dscx4h2l-Pk

‘Why Is My Curriculum White?’, LSE, February 2015 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGbxLPbetvo

Flipping the classroom in Meteorology

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

Dr. Andrew Charlton-Perez, School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences
a.j.charlton-perez@reading.ac.uk
Year of activity: 2015/16

Overview

12484A flipped learning approach to teaching the part 3 and part 4 module, ‘The Global Circulation’ (MT38A/4YA) in Meteorology was developed and tested. This approach was very successful, encouraging students to apply complex ideas to real-world problems.

Objectives

  • Develop a new set of learning resources which could be used both in a flipped learning or traditional lecture based delivery.
  • Test and evaluate if teaching in a ‘flipped learning’ style improved student engagement and higher-level learning.
  • Implement authentic assessment that models the real-world process of enquiry and peer-feedback.

Context

I’ve been teaching this module for eight years adding some enquiry-based learning elements around four years ago. While it has always received good student feedback, a colleague who moderated my exam scripts last year made me consider if students were as actively engaged with the module as I had previously thought. Looking at student work it was clear that while students could remember and reproduce sophisticated concepts and mathematical derivations, their ability to apply this knowledge to unfamiliar situations was limited.

Implementation

Prior to the course I developed a significant new set of learning resources for the course:

  • 21 short videos (between 4 and 6 minutes long) targeted at difficult concepts.
  • 13 online quizzes of ten questions in Blackboard Learn.
  • 24 new learning activities linked to the research literature which students completed during class. 12 of these activities were supported by simple numerical models developed from scratch in open-source Python code.

The course was delivered to students in Spring 2016. The first time the class met as a group I explained the flipped classroom idea and we negotiated an approach to learning.

Following this first meeting, the class operated in three, three-week units. During the first two weeks of each unit, students studied notes and videos in their own time and then completed the on-line quizzes (with instant feedback) prior to attending the next class. In class, students had a choice of two learning activities. Students worked with each other in small teams and with me to complete the problems, writing notes in a rough lab book.

In the third week of each unit, students prepared a more formal write-up of one of the problems as summative assessment for that unit. In extracting information from their lab book, students needed to think about how to frame the problem by stating a hypothesis they wished to test and put the work they had done in the context of the current research literature.

In class, students exchanged their work and gave peer-feedback to each other, before completing the formal write-up with the chance to ask additional clarification questions.

Impact

The change to a flipped learning style had a transformative impact on the module; Student feedback highlighted the benefits of the investment in a number of ways including that they enjoyed the flipped learning approach:

  • ‘The structure of the module was the best out of my three years of university, flipped classroom should be done more’
  • ‘Always felt engaged with the lectures thanks to a different learning style’
  • ‘… I could run over the tricky concepts in more detail on a 1-to-1 basis with the lecturer. Often the same question applied to others and the class environment allowed group discussions which really enhanced the learning in a relaxed and productive way.’

And that their learning was improved:

  • ‘…brought my attention to active research areas at the front of study – it got me very interested in the exercises.’
  • ‘Class room discussions made me learn more than in a lecture style class’
  • ‘It isn’t an easy module, but it is very rewarding’

Reflections

Teaching in a flipped learning style also had a significant impact on my own enthusiasm for teaching the course because the improvement in student learning and engagement was tangible. The image shows an example of student work produced on a white board by a small group during one of the class sessions, applying ideas from the core course material to a recent research paper. It was extremely exciting to see students applying complex ideas in this way and succeeding in writing high-quality research reports on their work.

The flipped learning approach also challenged me to think more deeply about the material because I needed to produce engaging and manageable problems for students to work on.

It was also very rewarding to see how much students made use of the new teaching materials I developed. By monitoring the use of the videos on Blackboard I could see that typically the videos were viewed between 100 and 150 times by the ten students on the course, indicating how important these videos were for student learning. Based on student feedback, short and engaging videos encouraged repeated viewing. I also included music in the videos, often with an oblique reference to the content and students commented that they enjoyed this element of fun! At the end of the course, students requested the ability to download and keep copies of the videos (this functionality is currently not available in Blackboard).

An important part of producing the videos was to also provide transcripts to ensure they were accessible for all students and this took quite a bit of time in addition to video production (which was relatively straight-forward).

The on-line quizzes had a completion rate of 80% with average marks above 70% for most students. As with the videos, the high level of engagement with these materials suggests that they were of an appropriate length and level of challenge for students (pitched so that a student who had studied the notes and videos could answer most questions without further detailed application).